They’re not just kids anymore

Though minors commit less crimes than adults, the figure below shows how mislead people might become due to unbalanced crime coverage. The impression becomes that minors are dangerous and require strong laws imposed on them.

















OFF BALANCE: Youth, Race & Crime in the News
www.buildingblocksforyouth.org/media/exec.html


The Safe Neighborhood Act clearly aims to minimize street crime. If passed, money will enter prevention programs and more money will enter into law enforcement and prison. Crimes are unfair to communities and to offenders who for any reason might feel the need to commit them. These are unfortunate situations, but they happen.

What I don’t like or understand, though, is why this proposition aims to try minors as young as 14 as adults for certain crimes, most notably, in any sort of gang-related crime such as recruitment or committing a violent offense.

Yes, I am aware that this was proposed as a manner of reducing gang participation and promoting strong regulatory consequences. While these are the intentions, though, the lives of some youth would be subject to the same consequence an adult would face in certain crimes.

What is important to note is that law and society hold minors different expectations than adults. Minors are still obliged to an educational system that is supposed to continue forming their paths as adults. To take a minor, possibly just entering high school and holding them accountable to the expectations of adults in order to prevent crime is an extreme manner of regulating crime. Rather than modifying law to punish minors, laws should mend to prevent certain minors from having to engage in unlawful activities.

An ironic addition to this is the fact that extending adult law over to minors would inevitably contribute to the expense of this bill. The indefinite amount of money necessary for this bill is explained in “Money Matters,” (you can also check it out at http://www.lao.ca.gov/ballot/2007/070919.aspx) however, while I do not wish to complain necessarily about the amount of very pricy proposition, I do want to reiterate the fact that in order to fund this proposition, 1% of California’s general fund will be utilized to pay for the known expenses (not including any unforeseeably glitches along the way). This means that money that would otherwise go to public schools would indeed be reallocated to fulfill the needs of this proposition.

While Prevention programs are a specified on the Safe Neighborhood Act, this acts as a small Band-Aid on a large bleeding wound. A little less than 15 % would address prevention AND rehabilitation programs in certain communities. Therefore, instead of initiating a drastic measure that prevents the crime in urban cities and that affects youth, a the proposition seeks a drastic measure that punishes minors as criminals before they can even have a place in society as adults.